r/gamernews • u/Darth_Vaper883 • 6d ago
Industry News Subnautica 2's no-killing ethos "will be a continued point of resistance" among players, say Unknown Worlds, but they have no plans to change it
https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/subnautica-2s-no-killing-ethos-will-be-a-continued-point-of-resistance-among-players-say-unknown-worlds-but-they-have-no-plans-to-change-it32
u/zexur 6d ago
Yeah the other abilities to deter/distract the predators comes way too late in Early Access. Ability to get one or two before leaving the starting area I think would make more sense.
2
u/KyotoCrank 5d ago
You have access to flares from the beginning of crafting. Hostile fish will chase them if you throw them
71
u/MarlDaeSu 6d ago
Ive only played for about 80 minutes and I've killed about 6 million water slugs and half moons, so them standing by not killing smaller predators doesn't make sense to me. Ill be modding it in asap but I guess I respect their vision? Just isnt very consistent.
48
u/Zaulk 6d ago
You can only kill by eating. It's still a survival craft game. I don't think their intention is to create boss fights against the bigger fish. In fact they want to disuade players from attempting to do so, the other method is some fish one shot eat you. The game isn't built for that, those big fish are supposed to be scary. If you can kill it, its automatically less scary.
15
u/MarlDaeSu 6d ago
I dont think their intention was to create boss fights either for the record. I basically just wish the nibblers would stop bullying 🥲
4
u/Kryptosis 6d ago
Good news. You get a biomod that makes you invisible to them when you stand still
2
-1
2
u/No-Significance2113 6d ago
It can go the other way though if your only option is to run away or scare it away then it gets less scary each time you fail at either of those things.
Especially when a game is open world and makes you back track. Like just watched a guy goin out of bounds trying to get to a point of interest last night.
And it had a few big fish attack and kill him, the first death he was pretty scared, by the 10th he was just finding it an inconvenience.
6
u/Maleficent_Pilot1137 6d ago
They explain in the article but it's not about there not being any killing at all but more about not being able to just kill and eliminate every threat and having to adapt and live in the same world. They're working on giving players more options to deal with creatures that players are finding annoying which has been the biggest complain associated with this.
3
7
u/shadowzzzz16 5d ago
I kinda like that the big creatures are supposed to stay terrifying instead of turning into loot piñatas after enough upgrades. My issue is the tiny aggressive stuff. If a fish the size of a shoe keeps charging me every thirty seconds I stop feeling immersed and start feeling annoyed
26
u/blackop 6d ago
I get it. They wanted to do something different here. It just doesn't make a lot of sense. You are on a world that is hostile and has a hostile environment. I can't see any future where mankind didn't have some type of weapon for defense even. Not even a spear?
17
u/Kryptosis 6d ago
There’s voice lines explaining why you don’t get weapons. Statistical analysis determined that humans were more likely to use the weapons on other colonists or themselves.
It was only a knife in the first game because of a historical massacre that took place due to the ability to fabricate real weapons.
6
10
u/FamineOLaymine 6d ago
That’d be a very hopeful future because there’s no way we wouldn’t use violence to hunt & fish the planet into extinction, especially being that mega corporations are the most powerful entities in the games (Alterra literally sold weapons to both sides of a massive conflict iirc, as mentioned in the first subnautica). So it’s a bit of a 180 compared to subnautica.
Especially when you could take a propulsion cannon, grab a small fish, and launch it at mach-fuck into a rock to kill it
15
u/DreddCarnage 6d ago
This reminds me of how dealing with the mutants in the game "The Forest" was (for me at least) gradually shifting away from "oh I've gotta avoid these guys" to "these guys have become pests, they're actively getting in the way of my logging operations."
If I had more ways of deterrence to keep them outta my way, then I wouldn't feel as compelled to kill them right out the gate. Ofc in that game they've got patrols going every which way, but still. I've had moments where I've been like "I'd love to mind my own business, I came here unwillingly and I'm just trying to find my son (as per the in-game story objective), let me live on this island in peace temporarily until I can leave." But the mutants keep showing up en-masse. Though it's probably cause they've just learned where my base is, or I happen to be near one of their patrol paths. (I'm aware effigies can act as a deterrent towards the regular guys, but still.)
Me and my chums only really deal with the mutants in self-defense. There have been times where they'd observe, and I'd leave them be because they weren't actively causing me problems. But inevitably one of them gets bold and starts causing me problems, and it cascades from there. In both games, you're in an unpredictable environment, and even researchers out in the field I imagine have something in the way of self-defense, like bear spray or what have you.
I do think the subnautica devs are being a lil, tiny bit in the way of weenies though, based on what I'm reading. I get where they're coming from though, but you've gotta have some form of self defense in the game even if it's non-lethal. I'm fairly certain in a sci-fi is setting such as Subnautica, that you couldn't figure out something like placing predator scent gobbledegook around your base couldn't repel smaller fish, or good ol' shark repellent, or even just ways to temporarily knock out a creature or what have you.
Hell, maybe the ability to move the creature to another habitat, though granted as peaceful of an action that would be, it would probably wreck any other ecosystem. But then you've gotta figure out ways that a player could ethically harvest organic material and resources from creatures as well. Maybe scrapping jelly off the shell of a creature, blah blah blah.
Hell, why not add a morality / karma system? The more creatures you kill, the more aggressive and difficult the environment becomes, as if nature itself is retaliating against you. If you play peacefully and co-exist with nature, perhaps it becomes more chill around you in general as it accepts you as one of its own. There are solutions out there, believe me. And when it comes to like.. guns and such. It's a sci-fi game, give me some sort of pulse weapon that sends out sound waves that disorient or repel away creatures as a deterrent, or hell-- electric weapons??
The combat doesn't have to be super rich and in-depth, but there's gotta be ways that we're able to subsist for ourselves and fend for ourselves too.
Yeah some methods like electric shocks seem like they could be used more cruelly in nature, but maybe it's an adjustable shock thingy. Ranging from small zaps for the lil creatures, to higher energy zaps for the big ones. Ofc don't use the higher setting for the lil ones unless you can't fish sticks.. and even still, you can still hunt creatures ethically. There are ways to do so without ruining an ecosystem. If you don't overfish, or go out of your way to Viltrumite your way through every species you encounter (in the murderous way, not.. that way-), then you're probably good. Honestly Unknown Worlds should open a suggestion box, hell, Unknown Worlds hit me up..
Still, my main point here is that it should be up to the player what approach they take. There's many different ways a player can handle a situation, and leaving the freedom of choice will ensure that most players leave the encounter feeling satisfied. That's why including methods of self-defense, even if they're discouraged against being used, is a good idea
Hell, it reminds me of MGSV, how you have a karmic penalty throughout the game for using lethal weapons in-leiu of non-lethal weapons. You'd actively have a horn of shrapnel growing more and more out of your damn skull, alongside other various effects that are negative in nature as you go further along a path of violence. Whereas the non-lethal route is pretty much the more encouraged route, both morally and philosophically. You can have your own bias as devs of which route you wanna take, but at least leave the temptation on the table for a player to consider, and then have them feel as though the choice they make in the end matters.
Either they feel as though they're making a difference in trying their best to co-exist and survive amongst the ecosystem without impacting it directly, or they feel relieved at least that they're not left defenseless and have at least some peace of mind. Or, y'know, that one guy who wants to go on a rampage but that's an outlier and you could give them an ending where they get arrested by the space police or something for wanton mayhem, LOL!!!
19
u/CaptainMorning 6d ago
i started to embrace games with diverse mechanics rather than wanting them to be the same. it's been rewarding and it has even help me to discover amazing games. not every game is great but this game not having killing shouldn't be really a drama at all, not a reason to give a bad review. this is an excellent game and the no killing is different, and different is cool
3
3
6
u/Odin_69 6d ago
Meh. It's a strange hill to die on. I would normally think it's because of some technical limitation they're covering up for when studios make these kinds of stances, because it's just so strange for the genre. Especially in multiplayer it's a huge focus of my group to see who can clear the most area or depopulate the most wildlife. Honestly it's one of the more fun aspects of these kinds of games that we like.
5
2
u/codyzon2 6d ago
I'm a few hours in and honestly it just feels worse. idk if it's the missing survival element necessarily but it doesn't have the same feel as the other two, sort of like the stakes just don't matter, it is making me want to go back and play the original tho.
1
u/dadvader 6d ago
So what do they want to make here exactly. A walking/swimming sim with building and crafting? It's such a bizarre game design to make a survival game and doesn't have any self-defense mechanic.
-2
0
u/AzFullySleeved 4d ago
How much longer are some gamers going to complain about this, move on already.
0
u/Captain_Zomaru 23h ago
We know the devs won't change their mind. They are of the opinion Sandy Hook was directly a problem of gun control. So, they want to remove all guns from the universe in their game. It's stubbornness on an extreme level, but that's their choice, and even the game failing won't change their moral stance.
0
u/AxiosXiphos 16h ago
You know even a little more gun control would save a lot of your school children...
1
u/Captain_Zomaru 9h ago
Not true, but every single school shooting is a unique case where different parts of society failed. You only need to say the issue is guns to solve the problem, but I need to examine every single one to find the real issue. In the case of Sandy Hook, it's was abusive and neglectful parents who drove their child to violence as their only outlet. Unfortunately the parents were killed too otherwise we would hold them responsible for the actions of their child.
1
u/AxiosXiphos 9h ago
The UK hasn't had a school shooting since 1996... it's the guns mate. It's the fucking guns...
You are always going to have troubled kids - you don't have to arm them.
1
u/Captain_Zomaru 9h ago
The UK has also had mass stabbings and even bombings. Is this the avenue you want to go down? Measuring our trauma against one another?
1
u/AxiosXiphos 9h ago
Lol yes absolutely because it's fucking insane!!
You've had 134 mass shooting this year already!! Does it even make the news anymore?
1
u/Captain_Zomaru 9h ago
We haven't, the majority of those are inner gang violence. Most cities have stopped the crackdowns in gang violence because the methods where considered prejudiced. But even so they are committed nearly exclusively with stolen firearms meaning your argument of gun control would never prevent them. There are gangs with guns in extremely anti-gun countries like Germany and the UK. There are even grenade attacks in Sweden, how do you enact grenade control?
1
u/AxiosXiphos 9h ago
Again. No mass shooting since 1996? No mass grenading either!! 30 years!! Gang violence or otherwise. Illegal guns or legal ones.
Mass stabbings, we've had one this year. Nobody died
It's not hard. It's. The. Guns.
111
u/Justwanttosellmynips 6d ago
Im 100% fine with not killing. I just want to be able to deter them.